Aviation Jobs:  Maintenance / Aircraft Maintenance Team Lead - Challenger
Company:  Aviation Personnel

Company Info:  Aviation Personnel is recruiting experienced, qualified technical and professional personnel for the following aviation/aerospace industry positions: A&P Mechanics Structural Sheet Metal Technicians Aircraft Inspectors Cabinet Makers and Finishers Aircraft Painters Composite Technicians Aircraft Upholsterers Interior Installers Avionics Technicians / Installers Contract, contract-to-hire and permanent placement options are available offering competitive wages, maximum per diem payments, weekly payroll and many additional benefits. Nationwide opportunities exist for aircraft maintenance personnel in manufacturing, maintenance centers, completion and modification centers, and fixed-base operations.
Call us today: 866-614-2840
Supported Manufacturers:    
Job Title: Aircraft Maintenance Team Lead - Challenger Location: BOISE Idaho USA
Contact: Recruiter
Email: jobs@aviationpersonnel.net

SUMMARY: Leads jobs assigned by Production Manager.
Inspects, tests, repairs, maintains and services aircraft using test equipment and hand tools, as needed, to return aircraft to service per FAA and manufacturers specifications.

KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS & ABILITIES: 
include the following. Other duties may be assigned.
•   Must be able to lead multiple airframes simultaneously
•   Ensures growth & development of Team members by assisting them in developing a career path.
•   Evaluate & assist in writing performance reviews of Team members with a Service Manager.
•   Coaches and mentors other technicians.
•   Displays and exercises Conflict Resolution skills.
•   Provides first level supervision to Team members.
•   Sets an example for others to follow. Lead by example.
•  Communicates effectively.
•  Displays the ability to multitask.
•  Proficient understanding of Federal Air Regulations (FAR) pertaining to his/her daily job
•  Ability to fill out work order/required paperwork

WORK ENVIRONMENT:
•   Work is performed in an aircraft hangar environment with moderate noise level. The employee is frequently subject to inside environmental conditions, which provide protection from weather conditions but not necessarily from temperature changes.
•  This position requires occasional fieldwork; the employee is exposed to outdoor weather and industrial type noise conditions

RESPONSIBILITIES:
•    Plans and manages aircraft visits, ensuring manpower, tooling and other resources are available
•   Adjusts resources as needed to accommodate workload variation and meet aircraft schedule.
•   Captures issues during a visit and communicates with stakeholders to ensure resolution.
•    Assists sales in bringing new customers to Western, including occasional customer visits.
•    Performs all of the duties of a Job Lead and has mastered inspection procedures.
•    Provides input to production scheduling on manpower requirements.
•   Directly supervises assigned lead technicians and their assigned technicians

Requirements:    

EDUCATION/EXPERIENCE:
•   Airframe & Powerplant Certifications required
•   6 +yrs. experience working on Challenger airframe
•    Minimum of 2 years supervisory experience

BEHAVIORS:
•    Displays lead technician attributes at all times
•    Maintains a high level of professionalism at all times
•    Ability to work independently and as part of a team
•    Good problem solving skills must be demonstrated with good follow-through required on communication and project completion
•   Able to handle change and deadlines well
•   Must be organized and detail oriented
•   Customer focused/Service Oriented
•    Positive attitude
•    Customer property awareness
•    Professional Appearance and Demeanor
•    Requires no supervision
•    Trains and mentors his/her replacement
•    Results oriented
•    Team oriented
•    Ability to follow directions
•    Excellent interpersonal communication skills
•    Situational awareness
•    Displays desire to proactively communicate with management to improve work environment

Fax Number: (866) 614-2841
Address: 4756 Highway 377 South
Fort Worth Texas 76116 USA
Email: tom@aviationpersonnel.net
Web Address: www.aviationpersonnel.net

I was one day looking for information about Rutan's Grizzly, a three surface STOL bush plane which doesn't look at all like the Piper Cub. Today, I found a related patent, how Burt Rutan managed to implement fowler flaps without external supports which create drag on cruise.

You can read it here: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4614320.html?query=PN%2F4614320+OR+4614320&stemming=on

Here is an article which includes some text about Burt Rutan's Raptor UAV.
www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1993/1993%20-%202623.html

Just accidentally when searching about Raptor UAV (this is off-topic to this posting, but anyhow contains interesting information including patent numbers), I found this: Burt Rutan's CV. Needless to say "Burt Rutan is my hero", but here is the CV of Mr. Rutan:

http://www.roycecarlton.com/speaker/Burt-Rutan-Curriculum-Vitae/

I was thinking about over 25000 feet cruise altitude for non-pressurized version of my concept, but I was yesterday Googling about death zone and effects of high altitude to human physiology, and it became quite apparent that it is not healthy to fly at 25000-30000 feet, it is too high altitude for humans to bear even with supplemental oxygen. Even with pressure masks like those on fighter pilots, it might not be very comfortable and safe. It is therefore not a surprise after all, why some non-pressurized GA planes are limited to 17500 feet (like Cirrus SR20 and SR22).

So the need for pressurization comes a lot earlier than I was thinking, and apparently even cruising over 20000 feet would pretty much require it.

Some articles about supplemental oxygen use:
http://www.dr-amy.com/rich/oxygen/

The highest altitude non-pressurized aircraft have been certified usually are 25000 feet according to quick searches to Internet. Columbia 400 (Cessna 400) is non-pressurized and certified to 25000 feet. Flight at that altitude require oxygen mask and it is just above the "death zone" which was mentioned in one Mt. Everest page I was looking yesterday.

According to one UAV report I have (SR22 was compared to a UAV airframe), Cirrus SR22 technical service ceiling is at about 33000 feet. SR20 on the other hand with a lot less excess power does not most likely reach its limit altitude of 17500 feet most likely unless it is very lightly loaded. On our trip to Mojave it barely made it to 11000 feet at gross weight and non-standard atmospheric temperature conditions (it was hotter than on standard atmosphere).

I have been looking quite a while how to get the aerodynamic design optimal and how to save there some drag, or a lot of drag, but a good design has also other parts taken into consideration. One of them which should not be underestimated is the structural and thus weight.

If we look for example EM-11 Orka, what is the problem with it when it is actually slower than aerodynamically less efficient and lower power Tecnam P2006T. It is pretty obvious what is the problem: it is not the aerodynamics of the plane (which is good) but the weight. The gross weight of Orka is very high, even higher than on DA42 that some people consider to be a lead-angel (lyijyenkeli). This has implications obviously to the empty weight too. That is very high as well. The empty weight-gross weight ratio is not actually bad in Orka, it is actually better than average. However, because of the gross weight being so high, the empty weight has to follow too. With the high weight, aerodynamic efficiency goes out of the door.

So it is very important that aircraft has minimum possible empty weight and as high as possible empty weight to gross weight ratio.

From the lighter end of the scale, Dynaero MCR01 is a good example. It is very lightweight, a lot lighter than its competitors. And it really shows positively in the performance. The wings in the ULC-model don't even incorporate a NLF-airfoil and the fuselage is all-turbulent behind the propeller. Still it is damn fast compared to all competition in its class with the same engine and propeller. The Dynaero's empty weight-cross weight ratio is not actually much better than on Orka, but because Orka is so much heavier and it is designed to carry so much more, the end result is very heavy (and it requires higher power engines than the Orka prototype originally had).

So this leads to a conclusion:
Previously mentioned gross weight of 818 kg for the twin concept is not unfounded. It represents ratio of 0.55 which is worse than on Orka or Dynaero MCR01. The goal has to be drawn somewhere. If the empty weight has to be more, e.g. 500 kg, that means 900 kg MTOW with ratio 0.55, and already a bit worse performance (speed (because the plane has to fly at higher Cl to maintain level flight on cruise and it is no good especially if the airfoil was designed to give its lowest drag at low Cl value) and climb performance).

Someone might be wondering why I don't talk about aerobatics much at all - Aerobatic planes require higher empty weight - gross weight ratios more than 0.55, and because of that I am not even thinking about a aerobatic plane which is intended for cross country flying. Efficient cross country machine has to be separate from aerobatic plane unfortunately because of restrictions what is achievable with even the best materials out there. Strength in airplane is not a place where a compromise can be made, it must be strong enough for the intended use or it is a deathtrap, and this leads to that the empty weight - gross weight ratio may not go much lower than 0.53 very easily on a small aircraft, especially without compromising something else like aerodynamics.

In these tough times, one sector feeling the turbulence has been aviation. But not everyone agrees. President of IndiGo Airlines, Aaditya Ghosh, has told NDTV that it is a myth that the aviation sector is doing badly and airlines no longer have a birthright to complain, instead they need to introspect.

I have been thinking the ways to achieve a design and implementation of a dream aircraft, and have concluded that it has to go in more than one step, so I was thinking the following milestones:

1. Unpressurized version, with a single turbo and fuel injection kit per engine. Possibly with a cabin similar to seen in Orka, avoid the manufacture of the doors. Woodcomp CS propellers. Target cruise altitude = 25000-30000 ft with supplemental oxygen. Corners cut where necessary to just get it done. No active boundary layer control, no wing tip propellers etc., rely on natural laminar flow to achieve efficiency. Unstable release of plans, calculations etc. Version A.
2. Open source plans stable release for the version A (CNC code, 3D models, 2D drawings, construction plans, layup schedules). Flight testing gives the final specifications for version B and ideas what to change to version B. Version A prototype is in use.
3. Optimized version of the above, version B. Modifications to version A prototype, version A becomes version B.
4. Stable release of version B plans (CNC code, 3D models, 2D drawings, construction plans, layup schedules). Version B might be alternative for a basis of a kit.
5. Pressurized version with doors, twin turbos per engine, intercooler and aftercooler per engine, computer controlled waste gates, and hybrid turbo compounding with two electric motors where one is functioning as generator and the the other runs the compounding. Possibly longer wings for high altitude flight. MT propeller or other higher end propellers. Possibly aerodynamic design changes, based on issues found in versions A and B and other improvements. Version C.
6. Open source plans stable release for the version C (CNC code, 3D models, 2D drawings, construction plans, layup schedules). Version C is a completely new aircraft and thus version B and version C coexists.

There are at least two milestones before 1.
-1 = concepting and collecting information, and creating needed softwares (present)
0 = initial concepting freezes, and version control repository (e.g. svn) exists for all data and there is a web page for the project.